i wouldn't dare to predict the winner of RG 2012 at this point of time b'coz :

1. Rafael nadal hasn't been the best for quite a long time..his last title came at RG 2011 !!..

2. Novak Djokovic hasn't started 2012 the way he wanted, but its still very good..a major & a master is damn good, but when compared to 2011, its strictly OK..he doesn't have the invincibility aura around him anymore.

3. Roger Federer has been the Player to beat since the US open 2011..he lost only 3 matches( isner @davis cup, nadal @aus open & roddick @miami ).However, judging by his performance at the clay season (previous years), Federer has always played well in Madrid—his only losses on clay there have been to Nadal. And the last time he skipped Monte Carlo, in 2009, he went on to beat Rafa in Madrid and the win the French Open and Wimbledon. He also never had much success in Rome.

4. the top 10 players( or top 20) have been playing decently till now..it would be foolish to write them off so early !

personally, for me, i can't predict for clay season on the basis of performance on hard court season..so unless monte carlo is over, i won't predict..

Ashwin.

Logged

You can ignore reality, but you can't ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.

Harsh words for Djokovic, ash. I don't think even Nole himself would say 2 out of 3 big trophies isn't up to snuff.

Hmm, Mr. Babblelot, I don't know what' s so harsh about what Mr. Ash said. I think it was pretty much spot on.He was comparing 2012 to 2011. As he said, a major and a masters this year is still "damn good", but when compared to 2011, it's not invincible like his record was up to this point in 2011. That's an accurate portrayal.

this forum is finally showing signs of life thanks to amazing people like clay death the destroyer, general shanks, general alex, general masterclass, general swish, falcon, tennisfan78, and some of the others.

this forum is finally showing signs of life thanks to amazing people like clay death the destroyer, general shanks, general alex, general masterclass, general swish, falcon, tennisfan78, and some of the others.

this forum is finally showing signs of life thanks to amazing people like clay death the destroyer, general shanks, general alex, general masterclass, general swish, falcon, tennisfan78, and some of the others.

All of those are good posters and from what I've seen masterclass is 'top shelf'.

this forum is finally showing signs of life thanks to amazing people like clay death the destroyer, general shanks, general alex, general masterclass, general swish, falcon, tennisfan78, and some of the others.

All of those are good posters and from what I've seen masterclass is 'top shelf'.

Harsh words for Djokovic, ash. I don't think even Nole himself would say 2 out of 3 big trophies isn't up to snuff.

Hmm, Mr. Babblelot, I don't know what' s so harsh about what Mr. Ash said. I think it was pretty much spot on.He was comparing 2012 to 2011. As he said, a major and a masters this year is still "damn good", but when compared to 2011, it's not invincible like his record was up to this point in 2011. That's an accurate portrayal.

I was thinking, Nobody cares about something you're not willing to discuss.

You have to ask yourself, masterclass: How much fun is it to talk about the fact that you have thoughts about something that you're not willing to talk about? Not much. Happy to have dragged it out of you. We need someone who's capable of critical thinking. Looks like you'll fill that great void.

I know that recording stats in ^^this^^ format is acceptable but I prefer.

Titles: 1Finals: 5Semifinals: 6

Seems to me that reaching 6 semifinals should be recorded thusly.

As you wish...and I understand what you are doing...but I strongly disagree. I'm listing and totaling the individual end results and one can only have 1 result per match. Doing it your way falsely inflates the numbers in that regard. I think it is understood by everyone that if one wins the title they have also won the first round through the final, or if one makes the final that they have won from the first round through the semifinal.

Look at it this way. If one recorded the total number of tournaments played as well, and the player did not finish lower than the semifinals, one might see something like this:

Somebody looking at the second way might be scratching their head for a bit.Also, in the second instance, if one didn't have the context that the player only played a total of 6 tournaments, one might falsely arrive at the conclusion that the player played in 12 tourneys, with a win, 5 final results, and 6 semifinal results.

The first way tells one at a glance what end result was achieved in the 6 tournaments and there is no confusion.Then, if one wants to calculate how many semifinal and higher results a player has achieved, one simply totals the individual semifinal, final, and title results.

Some clues Hercs? Looks like a greek warrior to me....not roman I think?

Yeah, you'll fit right in here, masterclass!

This is exactly the problem. Why should the conversations always be about statistics and tennis alone? Why not have a good time in general? Ultimately all these statistics say just one thing : I DON'T KNOW. LET THEM PLAY, WE SHALL WAIT AND WATCH.